8/23/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AUG 231993 Boa 90 F-Au27.8 Attorney Steve Henderson, representing Majestic Partners of Vero Beach, Ltd., the new owner of the remainder of the Sea Oaks project, emphasized that Sea Oaks has, indeed, filed an application for residential resort. His clients maintain that if the proposed LDRs are adopted, they would not be applicable to their application. That may be an issue that may come up at a later time and by appearing here today, they do not want that taken to mean that they waver from that position. Attorney Henderson noted that his clients question whether, in fact, the current LDRs or even the prior LDRs--actually prohibit the short-term stays of less than 30 days. Staff has been relying upon the definition of hotel/motel to assert that position, but his clients disagree. They feel that the current LDRs and prior LDRs do, in fact, permit rentals of less than 30 days in RM -6 zoning and other zoning categories as well. Having said that, he intended to refer to Sea Oaks' application for special exception only as an example of why they are opposing some of the amendments. Specifically, they oppose the adoption of items #2, #3, and #4. Attorney Henderson pointed out the special exception approval process provides the Board with discretion and significant control such as attaching special conditions and safeguards in order to insure compatibility and no adverse impacts. They feel that items 2, 3, 4 and 5, to some extent, are amendments that bear on the issue of compatibility, and they question why it is necessary to adopt these amendments when the special exception review process gives the ability to determine compatibility on a case by case basis. Majestic believes that developing the remainder of the Sea Oaks project into a residential resort would be compatible with the existing development. Obviously, if amendments #3 and #4 are enforced against Sea Oaks, it will eliminate the application, but Sea Oaks would like an opportunity to have a fair hearing on the issue of compatibility. Attorney Henderson stated that they are particularly concerned about the issue of the length of stay. Even though they maintain that the current ordinances do not impose a minimum length of stay, one of the reasons the developer is seeking residential resort is to legitimize the existing rental policies at Sea Oak and eliminate the question about the length of stay. He noted that covenants of 9 of the 11 associations at Sea Oaks permit rental periods of less than 30 days. Two of those associations permit rentals of a minimum of 7 days year-round. Sixty-seven percent of all the rentals at Sea Oaks during the period of June, 1992 to June, 1993 were for periods of less than 30 days. Majestic Partners is planning to continue the rental program that has been in effect for many, many years. 18